Imagine, if you can, what would happen if a new branch of royalty was created. For example if a county that formerly had a monarchy was to establish one again (Ireland, USA in Hawaii, etc whatever). Forget the common sense reasons of why, whatfor and it would never happen. Lets just say it did.

1. Do you think they would be accepted by the people, the other royals, and of course, everyone here at TRF, hahaha, as the real deal if lineage was proven. Even if they were commoners up to that point and had not lived their lives in anticipation of reigning? Would it make them any less worthy of reigning that any of the current royal families?

2. What would you like to see them do as new representatives of their people?

3. Would it be better if they were conservative and traditional, or more "with the times"?

4. And of course, finally, (especially for you jewelry fans) what could they do for regalia and the normal trappings for royalty when these things did not exist and could not be handed down? Should new things be made to resemble ancient symbols or should new symbols for a new reign be made?

The U.S. is already an Empire. The Imperial States of America, with Emperor George III from the Imperial House of Bush.

now, now there. Don't get yourself in trouble by bringing up that issue. This is a fun thread. :)

So, just for fun here are my answers
1. yes, people love glitz. Hollywood royalty is not enough
2. yes, why not.
3. I'll go for conservative but not stiff or snob. I would like a mix of the Spanish Borbons down to earth side, the glamour of Queen Margrethe of Denmark and absolutely none of that wild Monaco stuff.
4. for jewels and dress style, I love the Napoleonic era's neo-roman revival. If you got the chance, rent or buy the DVD Titus, they use a great modern era costume adaptation of Imperial Rome dresses.

Well I would have thought George II, since it was only him and his father, but then if you were including George Washington, I could see the George III thing. But aside from that (I hate American politics, and I'm an American!) I would love to see the Yugoslavian royal family be returned to power, even in a British RF role. Crown Prince Alexandar has worked very hard to promote the interests of Yugoslavia, and it would be nice to see him brought back as King.

By the way, I've always held this viewpoint, and I think I got it from the miniseries Edward the King, spoken by either Queen Victoria or Edward VII's character, mostly paraphrased by me: a monarch has a lifetime to learn and love their country. A president has four to eight years to do whatever they need to do, and even then it's not enough. The monarch is brought up, usually from birth, with their future position and they are (usually and hopefully) taught to respect the opinions of their countrymen. They hold a ceremonial position for the most part, but they are always a strong figure that the people can look up to in times of crisis. Presidents and prime ministers come and go, but a royal dynasty is forever. Until they're deposed, but let's forget that little detail :)

__________________His sense of responsibility is not less than yours or mine. How could we tell right from wrong as simple people in any kind of situation? How could we know that our courage, loyalty and lives were not misused for evil purposes?

There is no way any royal structure would work in America -- The people would never allow it. However, most countries could use a "Royal Family" to look at. Even in America there are a couple of families that are treated this way. The press, the clothes, the money, the travel, the parties and everything that would go along with a "Royal Lifestyle". Good luck to the family that is picked!

The USA is by definition not a monarchy of any kind although George W. Bush has conceded the American Revolution to George III, not George Washington.

The USA operates on the theory of equal opportunity rather than a theory of equality of distribution (such as socialism). Monarchy would symbolize restricted opportunity and what self-confident would-be billionaire wants that!? In the USA, many people are willing to forego sure bets such as universal health care and national pension plans for a one-in-one thousand chance to become rich.

The USA is busy proselytizing its state religion, capitalism. The theory of equal opportunity and the incessant preaching of capitalism largely explain why the USA is so vehemently anti-Communist and even anti-socialist.

Modern monarchies symbolize national unities, witness Queen Elizabeth criticizing Margaret Thatcher. In the USA, unity is not sought by the affluent and powerful. A united United States might ask them to join in paying more in taxes so people can get from A to B, see their kids educated in decent schools by good teachers, provide effective social services, pensions, health care, etc., etc., etc., etc. A united United States might place limits on the behavior of the rich, such as corrupting the political process or bilking workers and investors.

The USA has what is probably the most entrenched aristocracy outside of Latin America and some third world potentates, but the semblance of equal opportunity still exists. Unfortunately, that semblance fades as economic inequality spirals to ancien regime levels and economic opportunities are either outsourced or abandoned so illegal aliens can do the work for less.

The USA aristocracy is largely invisible, unlike the late 1800s when ostentation prompted outrage. But they're there and they control the political process, except when public outrage reaches critical levels. However, public outrage is controlled by chronic culture wars over issues such as flag burning, abortion, homosexuality, and welfare.

So the USA is anti-monarchist, but is developing the economic and social characteristics of ancien regime monarchies.

If only theoritically, I would think that the only family that could hope of becomming the "Royal Family of the USA" is the Kennedy. JF was practically a King and Jackie was pratically a Queen, with their children being regarded almost as real Princes.
It's a funny thread but I don't think it could ever be true, especially in the case of USA.

__________________Queen Elizabeth: "I cannot lead you into battle, I do not give you laws or administer justice but I can do something else, I can give you my heart and my devotion to these old islands and to all the peoples of our brotherhood of nations." God, Save The Queen!

The U.S. is already an Empire. The Imperial States of America, with Emperor George III from the Imperial House of Bush.

Technically, King George III of Great Britain from the Hanoverian house would have been the last American king so if somehow, some way (God forbid, please!) a House of Bush came about and Dubya was crowned he would have to be King George VI wouldn't he?
George Washington was never crowned, even though it was considered, so he couldn't be counted as a king. I imagine you have to start the count from George III of Britain.

While discussing how a new monarchy would be created can be fun, I'd like to remind you that political discussions are not allowed on TRF - considering that we do come with different political views and backgrounds and what is considered right by someone is wrong for someone else. If we could keep this discussion theoretical - without involving current politics/political figures' opinions, it would be much appreciated.

I don't see a United kingdom of America. (Thank God for that).
But I can easily imagine other countries following Spains example and going back to monarchies. Several of the former USSR countries were monarchies and their royal families still seem to be very much involved in the international royal circus. (Romania, Bulgaria)
If any of those countries would indeed do this step, I doubt , we see much of a difference, the jewels are still there, the emblems and regalia too, the palaces would need some serious renovation, but the membership on Prada and Dior customerlists has already been gained some time ago. And since they are cousins and xx cousins **removed, and already have invitations to any event within the royal circus, no difference here either.
About their suitability to become king/queen and crownprince/ss:
Look at the greek royal family they haven't got a good change to return to their former kingdom and yet the princes and princesses were all brought up to fit the role (to an extent to which I wonder if they have ever thought of themselves as normal people and not royals in waiting)

I think by mentioning Hawaii, I inadvertently brewed a political storm. I was merely trying to set an example of a monarchy that had not been in establishment in a long time. Better examples would be the high kings of Ireland which have several chiefs descended from them but no one clear heir, or better the Incans where it is unsure if any family members survived (Chantal Millers urban legend notwithstanding). Basically a relative unknown on the world stage, no close relation to any existing royal, and one maybe not born to privilege and certainly not on the current invite list. I'm sure there would be no coronation robes or diamond tiaras found from Tupac Amaru II or Brian Boru to be inherited. However their descendants would be royal just the same. Its all meant in creative fun.

Several of the former USSR countries were monarchies and their royal families still seem to be very much involved in the international royal circus. (Romania, Bulgaria)

What?? I know Stuttgart is in the western part of Germany and therefore was on the western side of the iron curtain and a bit further away from the above mentioned countries, but what?? Romania and Bulgaria had been sovereign states during the cold war.

I think for Bulgaria,the back of monarchy will be more than accepted,their choice of the actual president who is technically a royal "in exile",shows that they want to cut off with any connection with the east block,as the royal families were often pro-west.

An other example,is Afghanistan,the actual president is also the exiled king,who was back as a president,but I think Afghan people did not yet accept him.

well, even though we have a Queen, i'll go for it. Our royal family would make it a priority to spread the word that Canada, contrary to what you've read/heard is not completey covered by snow, polar bears do not roam around most of this country, not all canadians love celine dion.

There is no way any royal structure would work in America -- The people would never allow it. However, most countries could use a "Royal Family" to look at. Even in America there are a couple of families that are treated this way. The press, the clothes, the money, the travel, the parties and everything that would go along with a "Royal Lifestyle". Good luck to the family that is picked!

Well, it almost happened.
When the colonies were looking for a form of government to unite so many colonies the closest one was a monarchical system. George Washington was offered the Crown of a theoric United States monarchy, just like Agustin de Iturbide was elected to be Emperor of Mexico when the attempt to bring a Bourbon Prince to live in Mexico failed. Jose de San Martin, the liberator in South America, was also a monarchist. And before San Martin a Spanish princess named Carlota, married to a Portuguese prince, attempted to separate the provinces that now form Argentina and carve out a separate Bourbon Kingdom so she could face off Napoleon I herself (he dethroned her brother the King of Spain) from her own South American empire.

But back to Washington, he decided not to accept the Crown and seems the idea wore off. The United States based their form of government in the style of the Republic of Venice and from there created their own version and identity. And the rest is history.
...and this thread is what is called in literature an Alternative HistoryWhat If...fun thread. :)

as Kimebear pointed out:

Quote:

Originally Posted by kimebear

Imagine, if you can, what would happen if a new branch of royalty was created...
Be creative and give me your suggestions. Lets have some fun!

from Wikipedia:...Alternate history or alternative history is a subgenre of speculative fiction (or some would say of science fiction) that is set in a world in which history has diverged from history as it is generally known; more simply put, alternate history asks the question, "What if history had developed differently?"

Thank you Toledo for pointing out that this is meant as fun, nothing more. Since I created the thread, (and at the risk of being seen as utterly crazy:p ) I'll give my take on it. PS: I just saw the DaVinci Code this evening and it inspired me.

What if:

France, in an effort to forget that whole guillotine thing, decided to re-established a monarchy outside of the Louis and Marie Antoinette line (please no hate posts honorable French members. I spent a year living in Paris attending school and have nothing but love for your country, this is fantasy talk). A long lost descendant of the Merovingians was found living in Paris, the middle class owner of a patisserie with a wife and two children. To sweeten the deal, a swiss bank account with untold wealth is discovered to be the sole property of any proven heir (I said this was fantasy, didn't I )

1. I think acceptance of new royals would be difficult at best, even by royalty buffs, but I would hope that they would be given time to prove themselves worthy of respect. I also don't think it would mean they were any less "royal" that any of the families on the current thrones. Royal blood is, after all, what their reigns are based on. They are not elected royals. Which brings me to:

2. I first would like them to only be figurehead leaders. Representatives, or goodwill ambassadors if you will, not any part of the actual government. I'm a firm believer in elected government. Absolute monarchies are really a thing of the past. I also would like to see a wealthy (and I emphasize wealthy) royal family who gives money back to the people they represent instead of being paid to represent it, and instituting and paying for educational and socially beneficial programs. Of course there are current royal families who are not weathly and are "professional royals" and that is just fine. I'm not criticizing them or suggesting they change.

3. I definitely would like to see a conservative monarch under these circumstances. Not snobby and uptight, but dignified and worthy of respect. There have been far too many royal scandals in the past few years and those (who shall remain nameless) need to be reminded that royalty is a privilege and should be treated as such.

4. My favorite part - the jewels!!!!! As much as I love the history behind "lost" royal jewels, I would want a new family to have new belongings. Traditional in style, borrowing symbols from their own history, without the vulgarity of purchasing someone else's heritage.

These are only my opinions and daydreams. I do not mean to offend anyone.

My alternate history versions, anyone with talent to write fiction feel free to elaborate them in a book if you wish:

France: After WWII General de Gaulle restores the Bonapartes or Bourbons like it happened in Spain when Franco returned the country to a monarchy.

Germany: After WWII the allies, out of fear of the Soviets, restore Germany as a single unit monarchy, as in one Emperor and no more of that mini state business. But who will be crowned is the big question.

Italy: After the WWII the Savoys are out and the Bourbon-Napoles are in.

Iceland separates itself from Denmark and Ireland from Britain as a monarchy, with local dynasties.

19 Century: The USA is split after the civil was and the South makes a monarchy from those States. I believe there are alternate history books on the subject already.

China: Mao wins but brings back the last Emperor or, declares himself Emperor.

There are a few books on this interesting subject, on favorite of mine is Roma Eterna that ponders the question what if Rome never fell? Another one is The Years of Salt and Rice about the black plague killing everyone in Europe so when the invasions came there was no one left around, making China and the Muslim Empire fight for world domination.

On the costume and jewlery, I think whatever period in history where a nation controlled the others will make the costumes and accesories prevail to the present. Like in Japan and many Muslim kingdoms with their traditional dresses but with modern adaptations. The movie Dune, the De Laurentiss version, used the Renaissance to inspire the court dresses. The recent movie Chronicles of Riddick (the director's cut of course) explains how they used German Baroque to inspire their futuristic imperial buildings here is another take

Only see 1 major problem with your alternate history method. If you go back in time and change the foundation of a country, the whole outcome of WWI and WWII would be different! So my question would be "Who are the allies?"
Sorry to be no fun!

Ok people, IF there would be an American royal family, I would surely by the Queen. lol I for one, am glad that we don't practice monarchy, I like the way we do things. But I do agree that we have had and probably still have families who were or are viewed in our country like the royals in their respective countries. The Kennedy scenario is very true. But what a tragic ending. Good thread!